hello3719 said:
Lenght is relevant in a research paper?
A paper of 1 page can be good enough to win the Field's Medal. But it is more than just length - I said amount of material with an implicit 'new'.
His paper to which I allude, and was available in the Number Theory forum last time I checked, is both short and lacking in ideas, rigour, conclusions, calculations, examples, theory, references, an abstract, a "for further research" part, what this doesn't tell us (how to do an integral to evaluate pi(x), the prime counting function), what we'd like it to tell us, where to look for the answer... None of those alone is essential, but some collection of them is desirable.
What is there is plausibly correct, but the author himself fails to convince anyone of its merits. And claiming that it is easier to evalutate a triple integral
1. over an infinite volume with an unknown location of poles,
2. whose complexity is independent of the argument of pi(x), and
3. which would require you to be accurate to within 10^-{4n} when calculating the integral numerically when x is of order 10^n,
than to use the sieve method of even Legendre is never going to gain much credence until he tells us how to do the integral.
What is in that "paper" is the starting point to him getting material which might be publishable. Though the feeling is that that isn't going to happen unless he either knows all the zeroes of the zeta function, or finds some incredibly good way of evaluating triple integrals numerically. One of which is worth 1,000,000 USD.